Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: Configure HCRX_EL2 dynamically
From: Kristina Martsenko
Date: Tue Sep 19 2023 - 07:26:23 EST
On 18/09/2023 12:10, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Kristina,
Hi Marc,
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2023 13:48:38 +0100,
> Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> At the moment the HCRX_EL2 system register is always initialized to
>> HCRX_GUEST_FLAGS when running a guest. Instead, choose the configuration
>> at vcpu reset time and save it in the vcpu struct, similarly to how
>> HCR_EL2 is set up. This will be needed in a subsequent change to
>> configure the register based on CPU features detected at runtime.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h | 5 +++++
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 +
>> arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c | 1 +
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h | 2 +-
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c | 1 +
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/pkvm.c | 1 +
>> 6 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> index 3d6725ff0bf6..64ea27e6deb1 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
>> @@ -134,6 +134,11 @@ static inline void vcpu_ptrauth_disable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 &= ~(HCR_API | HCR_APK);
>> }
>>
>> +static inline void vcpu_reset_hcrx(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> + vcpu->arch.hcrx_el2 = HCRX_GUEST_FLAGS;
>> +}
>> +
>> static inline unsigned long vcpu_get_vsesr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> return vcpu->arch.vsesr_el2;
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> index af06ccb7ee34..2764748756a7 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -487,6 +487,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_arch {
>>
>> /* Values of trap registers for the guest. */
>> u64 hcr_el2;
>> + u64 hcrx_el2;
>
> Do we really need this extra field? Yes, this is only an extra 64bit,
> but they tend to accumulate...
>
> Looking at patch #3, the change is related to this:
>
> vcpu->arch.hcrx_el2 = HCRX_GUEST_FLAGS;
> +
> + if (cpus_have_final_cap(ARM64_HAS_MOPS)) {
> + vcpu->arch.hcrx_el2 |= HCRX_EL2_MSCEn;
> + vcpu->arch.hcrx_el2 |= HCRX_EL2_MCE2;
> + }
>
> meaning that this is a constant value for a given boot of the host.
>
> At this stage, I'd rather you define HCRX_GUEST_FLAGS as:
>
> #define HCRX_GUEST_FLAGS \
> (HCRX_EL2_SMPME | HCRX_EL2_TCR2En | \
> cpus_have_final_cap(ARM64_HAS_MOPS) ? \
> (HCRX_EL2_MSCEn | HCRX_EL2_MCE2) : 0)
>
> and drop the new field altogether, until we have something that
> requires dynamic flipping of an HCRX_EL2 field.
Makes sense, the field isn't strictly required yet, I'll drop it in v2.
Thanks,
Kristina